Web Only /
Features » October 23, 2012

Meet ‘Me-Too’ Mitt

Email this article to a friend

your email

your name

recipient(s) email (comma separated)

message

captcha

No doubt this latest version of Romney makes perfect sense in the world that he has constructed inside his own mind, where there must be some grand unified theory that reconciles all the shape-shifting and contradictions that define his political career.

At the conclusion of last night’s last presidential debate, which focused on foreign policy, noted foreign-policy wonk and former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin appeared on Fox News to deliver her expert analysis.

“There were so many untruths spewed by Obama tonight. Unfortunately, Romney just didn’t have time to answer them all,” Palin opined, adding that she sure does wish the media would call out Barack Obama on all his lies.

On his pre-debate show earlier in the evening, Fox host Bill O’Reilly posed his own dim view of the president. “Many, including Governor Romney, believe that President Obama’s foreign policy has weakened America and emboldened our enemies,” according to O’Reilly.

Given the way Palin and O’Reilly framed it, you might think the debate pitted two men who hold extraordinarily diverging viewpoints. But the main difference between them, as it turned out, was the size of their lapel pins.

Recall that in the 2008 campaign, Obama had briefly resisted wearing a flag pin on the basis that it’s a cheap and empty expression of patriotism (not his actual words), before buckling under the pressure. And last night the grand old flag was pinned to both men’s jackets, as always. But Romney’s was just a bit bigger and bolder.

“My flag is bigger,” seems to be Romney’s general strategy at this point. That is, he accepts Obama’s ideas and policies, but promises to supersize them. Obama is a friend of Israel? Israel and I are totally BFF! Obama has increased defense spending every year? I’ll increase it by two trillion dollars!

Romney’s problem in trying to distinguish himself on foreign policy is that the main line of attack he anticipated using against Obama—the recent attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Libyathat resulted in the murder of four Americans—has fizzled. Though Republicans have tried hard for weeks to gain traction with the issue, accusing the administration of incompetence (or worse) and a cover-up, the tragedy is too distant to be a game-changer. And the Obama administration’s defense of its behavior has mostly held up under the GOP’s scrutiny.

If the issue resonated, Libya would no doubt have been the centerpiece of an argument for a more hawkish foreign policy. But Romney barely touched the subject. Instead, he made the obligatory noises about being tough on Iran and then went the Obama-plus route. Obama believes in building strategic alliances? Me too—but more so!

Maybe the most startling moment of the night was hearing Romney talk about building the civic infrastructure of foreign nations, about the importance of fostering education and gender equality in the Middle East, and about working with our allies in the region. A Republican hasn’t talked like that since George W. Bush, who, in a presidential debate 12 years ago this month, said, “If we’re an arrogant nation, [other nations will] resent us. … And our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power, and that’s why we’ve got to be humble, and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom.”

Well, we know how that worked out.

Did Bush ever mean those words about humility? Did Romney mean his words about cooperation last night? If appearances are any indication, Romney seems more comfortable in the guise of conciliator than hawk; while for Bush, the post-9/11 warmongering and “they hate us for our freedom” speeches seemed to come naturally.

It might have been a winning strategy if Romney had sold himself as Obama-plus all along, somehow managing to win the Republican primary as a healer. But it seems like a dubious strategy at this point. It’s hard to imagine that it made Palin and O’Reilly and their ilk happy, hearing their candidate bill himself as a slightly enhanced version of a man they disdain as a serial liar and a denier of American exceptionalism.

From the progressive perspective, meantime, it's a litle discouraging that it's so easy for Romney to become one with the Democrats on foreign policy. Simply by adding a touch of dove to his hawkishness, Romney can make himself almost indistinguishable from Obama.

No doubt this latest version of Romney makes perfect sense in the world that he has constructed inside his own mind, where there must be some grand unified theory that reconciles all the shape-shifting and contradictions that define his political career.

What would he actually do, though, with the power of the presidency? Would he be an enhanced Obama or another Bush? Something else? Which version of himself would emerge is probably as much a mystery to Romney, at this point, as it is to everyone else. One prays we’ll never find out.

Theo Anderson, an In These Times writing fellow, has contributed to the magazine since 2010. He has a Ph.D. in modern U.S. history from Yale and writes on the intellectual and religious history of conservatism and progressivism in the United States. Follow him on Twitter @Theoanderson7 and contact him at [email protected]

BUDGET BALANCE TIME1945 -1980 we taxed high incomes and estates to pay down WWII debt.In those years we had fabulous economic growth.The Middle Class had much economic growth.Now, it is payoff time.We need to pay down the Republican Tax Cut Debt.Our income is $14,000 Billion.The 2013 budget calls for $2900B in revenue and a $900B deficit.It is a disgrace that we will not pay our way instead of leaving it for our kids to pay.We rank 4th on Inequality in OECD nations. Richest on earth. Yet! We rank third as Least taxed in OECD nations. Only Chile and Mexico tax less of GDP than America. Yes! We rank number two on taxing our corporations even though our top rate is highest. Obviously, something is crazy in America.Since 1980, our tax rates have been cut cut cut to favor the wealthy.In 2008, the top 50% got 86% of all individual income and paid 12..5% tax rate.That ratio has been similar for years.70,00,000 workers took home 14%. We Must return to taxing Wealth and high incomes. Would a higher estate tax hurt the ONE family which owns more wealth than 90% of our families. Romney wants to zero it not raise it to help balance our budget and pay down some of the debt that helped him get very rich.We CAN balance our budget. We CAN pay down our debt. The rich will fight any change.The Middle Class needs help to regain a good Standard Of Living. Help them. Clarence Swinney mitt=moincometaxtricks

Posted by Clarence Swinney on 2012-10-26 15:43:30

OBAMA ON TARGETHe campaigns on who can create jobs since the Republicans have no plan.His message that the wealthy and corporations need to pay their FAIR share of Total Incomeand the dire need for jobs is getting attention. He is correct to run on the economy since he was left a skeleton. Create jobs, protect entitlements, build the middle class, make wealth give in on more contribution.He must stress over and over how the opposition fought every good thing he tried to achieve no matter how much it hurt the people. Paint them as villains. Ask the people to help him get America back on a track of jobs and more equality.

Posted by Clarence Swinney on 2012-10-26 06:18:15

Of the total $8.8 billion, about $5.3 billion goes to families in the poorest 20 percent of the country. If the expansion expires, “working families earning less than about $13,350 would be ineligible for any child credit, and families with two children wouldn’t qualify for the full credit until their earnings surpass $26,683.” In 2010, the expansion of the Child Tax Credit kept one million people out of poverty.